Old corrupt judges presiding over an antiquated judicial system which deliberately prevents law centres from spreading access to all people. The law does not exist to ensure justice in society but so that the rich can protect themselves against attacks by the poor. The law is a complete irrelevance to the poor since they cannot afford to use it.

"The judge "too ill" to face a fraud trial is now set to pick up a whopping £500,000 pension from the taxpayer. Richard Gee will hit the jackpot if he retires on medical grounds. And the bumper payout will ensure he can continue his lavish lifestyle well into old age. Judge gee was suspended after being accused of a £1 million mortgage scam. But he has been drawing his full salary of £86,801 a year since then. He was also on legal aid for the court case, which has cost the public an estimated £3 million - even though he has off shore bank accounts in jersey and switzerland. He owns three homes in chelsea, portugal and the united states. The judge finally walked free on wednesday after attorney general john morris qc ruled he was ‘not fit to stand trial'."[54]

Judges also have a habit of letting off paedophiles. "A sex monster was on the run last night after being found guilty of rape. Evil trevor masters jumped bail as a jury, unaware he'd vanished, considered 14 charges against him. He was found guilty of 9, including one rape and four sex offences against a child. Cardiff crown court had heard how he put four victims through rape and sex ordeals during attacks over 20 years."[55] Is it not amazing that this man could have got away with these crimes for twenty years, and then be given bail on such serious charges? Its typical of the paedo loving judges running this country, "A convicted paedophile walked free from a court yesterday after a judge said he had suffered enough through being "named and shamed". Ex-teacher raymond cullens. Judge stuart fish gave him 15 month suspended prison sentence ..."[56]

In the first half of the 1990s a number of people were released from prison because it was discovered that judges had failed to evaluate the evidence to determine their innocence. Many of those released had been in prison for over a decade. None of the judges were forced to resign and all continued to work until their deafness makes it physically impossible for them to pretend they know what they are doing.

Most brutish judges have been the victim of a horrifying nazis experiment in social cloning.

The most blatant privilege of being a judge is being able to let off your friends for any crimes they have committed.

"The High Court judgement which declared the ban on the export of live animals illegal is one of the most political decisions taken by that court for a very long time. This judgment outlaws conscience and denies the fundamental right which applies to every shopkeeper, publican and hotelier - to choose whom they will or will not do business with. To decree that the free market must triumph over individual beliefs is an illustration of how far our society has degenerated. Livestock production is at the heart of almost every environmental catastrophe facing the planet."[57]

Doubtlessly every criminal in the country is calling out the name of nasty nick to preside over their pending court case. Talk about being soft on criminals. Roy hattersley argues we shouldn't expect members of the law lords to have any integrity, "Everyone knew that the withdrawal of the royal navy's survey ship from the south atlantic convinced the argentine junta that britain no longer cared about the falkland islands. But lord franks absolved the government, which had saved £3m by bringing hms endurance home and spent £1.6 bn on the war which that decision provoked, from all blame. The establishment rarely condemns its own. Lord phillips concludes that "the campaign of reassurance was a mistake". Amen to that. But it is less easy to endorse his judgment that "the government did not lie"."[58]

Brutish journalists are amongst the most snivelling, pathetic, servile, cretins to be found anywhere around the world, so we have to thank our american friends for revealing the following interesting information about the bribes given to phillips to encourage him to produce a whitewashing report, "Here are the promotions and new titles received by Phillips during the Inquiry. These reached their grandest moment in appointment to Master of the Rolls (a title of Pooh-Bah ridiculed a century ago by Gilbert and Sullivan in the Mikado). In January 1999, it was announced that the judge who is overseeing the proceedings, Sir Nicholas Phillips, now 62, is to be a Law Lord. He has been appointed Lord of Appeal in Ordinary and is to be known as The Rt. Hon. The Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers. Phillips was then promoted during the inquiry to the Lords Justices; as the Inquiry neared the end, he was promoted again, in June this year, to Master of Rolls in the Court of Appeal and Head of Civil Justice, with Lord Justice Nourse filling in until Phillips assumes his new duties on October 1. The Right Honourable Sir Nicholas Addison Phillips, Knight, a Lord Justice of Appeal, having been appointed a Lord of Appeal in Ordinary and created Baron Phillips of Worth Matravers, of Belsize Park in the London Borough of Camden, for life--was, in his robes, introduced between the Lord Alexander of Weedon and the Lord Mustill. [House of Lords Tuesday, 12th January 1999]. In short, heading up this inquiry really put Phillips' career on the fast track."[59] It is now obvious that the reason phillips dragged this report out for over two years was simply because the longer he did so the more bribes he could extort from the eco-nazis in the government.

.. "in the past five years, in all but five of 143 public inquiries into roads, the inspector has recommended the road be built, and in three cases within that five the inspector's negative recommendation has been overruled and the road built anyway."[60]

The Brutish navy shot the Belgrano in the back. The brutish SAS shot the ‘gibralter three' in the back. In 1990, the brutish air force shot iraqi conscripts fleeing back to iraq after the invasion of kuwait.

"A police force has closed a website (policecorruption.co.uk) set up by one of its officers to attack corruption."[62]

.. "the uncritical press coverage of the queen mother's pageant was published on the same morning as a coruscating report from the united nations, condemning the level of censorship under which british newspapers have to operate, along with this country's pitiful record on freedom of information. Did you know that one of the most thorough books ever written about the windsors - The Royals by Kitty Kelly - cannot be bought in britain? It's a best seller in the u.s. but not only has it never been published here, british booksellers will not even import it for fear of prosecution. And why is it effectively banned in this country? Because .. it reveals them for what they are - a wealthy, self centred, dysfunctional, thoroughly unpleasant, and not very likeable family."[63]

"Roger Windsor, the former chief executive of the NUM, named in a Commons motion on Wednesday, as an undercover MI5 agent .. (was the man who made) false allegations of corruption against the leadership of the NUM in the Daily Mirror in 1990."[64]

There are those who blame politicians for the bse slaughters - forgetting that many politicians, especially those in the house of lords, are pharmers. Pharmers are the main distributors of bse. However, the fact has to be faced that the brutish media have helped to perpetuate the bse slaughters and thus are complicit in these crimes: firstly, because they have never bothered to research the truth; secondly, they have done nothing to challenge the pharming status quo; and, thirdly, because their pro-pharmer bigotry overshadows even their concern for the protection of consumer health.

The tory government's silencing, sidelining, and sacking, of scientists involved in the bse-cjd crisis was by no means an isolated phenomena. The failure of the country's top scientists to denounce the government's pseudo-scientific nonsense was not an accident. Since 1979, successive tory governments have promoted policies which have increased scientists' dependence on multi-national corporations. The situation has deteriorated to such an extent that one world renown scientist felt confident to state that he was the only independent scientist left in the country.

The government has privatized more and more regulatory functions. It has done this for several reasons. Firstly, because it believed that research could be carried out better by industry. Secondly, to allow industry to do what it wanted (such a policy was promoted under the rubric of ‘businesses taking responsibility for their own affairs' - even though this created a conflict of interest between producers and consumers/workers. The privatization of state regulation has made large numbers of scientists dependent on multi-national corporations.

The result of the government's insistence on universities 'paying their way' is that campuses have been invaded by industry and commerce (science parks being the tip of the iceberg). This has pushed research away from theory and the pursuit of truth towards commercial applications. University researchers are increasingly dependent upon private industry for grants, gratuities, contracts, careers, status, awards, recognition, honours, and pensions, etc.. Today the main aim of academic research is not truth but profit and the protection of the interests of multi-national corporations.

Governments of all complexions have often chosen politically conventional scientists to sit on advisory committees in order to provide them with the results that they want. What is different from the past is that even if the government wanted to rely on impartial and objective scientists it can no longer do so because there are none left. The government's changes in regulatory authorities and educational institutions has meant that virtually all of the scientists who might be called to serve on a government's scientific advisory committees are now are financially dependent, in one way or another, on multi-national corporations.

"Serious ramifications for the future of the independence of brutish science occurred when brutland's office of science and technology, the government's science body, was moved from the cabinet office to the control of the department of industry in july 1995. ‘Try as you might,' wrote the leader writers at new scientist, ‘it is impossible to find a logical reason for last week's decision .. And what of research on the environment - the results of which are often painful for industry?"[65]

(The royal society is composed of fellows of the society [frs]). The society .. "publishes many of the most prestigious journals in science. Outraged by what they saw as media ‘misrepresentation' of the experiments of arpad pusztai, the royal society established a ‘rebuttal unit' in 1999 to ensure that journalists heard the wisdom of its elders more easily. Set up as a product of royal patronage, the society's funds have traditionally come, with minimal parliamentary scrutiny, from the public purse. More recently it has begun to receive substantial funds from transnational biotechnology corporations, such as rhone poulenc and glaxo welcome."[66]

Scientists in the nuclear power industry have been some of the most blatant scientific liars in the country. It has a long history of lying about nuclear power almost from its inception.

Bnfl refused to carry out health tests on workers in the industry and those living in surrounding areas. It was only after a television documentary publicized a scientific study which revealed the existence of leukaemia clusters around windscale that the public began to doubt bnfl's smug reassurances that the public's health was not at risk. It was only after a further investigation which corroborated the original allegations, that bnfl decided to carry out its own research, "BNFL has commissioned a £15 m research programme into childhood leukaemia's around windscale ... the first since it was built."[67] Clearly, the purpose of this research is not to find the truth about the health of its workforce but to limit its legal liability. It still denies responsibility for any deaths caused by cancer amongst its workforce or the surrounding inhabitants.

"In september bnfl revealed that data on reprocessed material at sellafield was falsified. Japan, germany, sweden and switzerland have since cancelled fuel imports from the plant."[68]

In the past, one of the factors which undermined scientific integrity was that state funded scientists might be corrupted by the state. The most blatant example of this was the nuclear power industry. The government needed nuclear weapons but these could be built only by using radioactive material from the civil nuclear power industry. As a consequence, the civil nuclear power industry had to deny its connections with the military in order to protect its interests. The body set up to regulate the industry was composed of scientists who'd been brought up through the nuclear power industry's training school in lies and propaganda so the regulators saw their role as protecting the nuclear power industry from the public not the other way around.

For most of its existence the national radiological protection board (nrpb) ignored all requests to monitor the effects of radiation on the environment, "The National Radiological Protection Board refuses to measure plutonium around Windscale."[69]

The nrpb was set up to protect the public and consumers from the nuclear power industry but it soon went native and acted as a means of protecting the nuclear power industry from the public, "A study by the National radiological Protection Board is expected to report that there has been no huge jump in radiation levels in Britain in the past five years despite the thinning of the ozone layer."[70]

The tories have dismantled state owned industries run by state owned scientists and replaced them with privately owned multi-national corporations serviced by privately owned scientists. State corruption has become private corruption.

"Unelected quangoes have grown in size and importance - there are now around 60,000 quangocrats compared to just 25,000 local councillors in the country. The government has also used its power of patronage to reward political supporters. Thus christopher benson, chairman of the sun alliance group which donated £280,000 to the conservative party was appointed to the funding agency for schools. A report by the ‘independent' stated that of the 185 nhs trust chairs examined, 62 had clear links with the conservative party."[71]

"Health secretary frank dobson was caught up in a row with the head of britain's surgeons yesterday after saying that all three doctors involved in the bristol heart scandal should have been struck off. Heart surgeon james wisheart, 60, and john roylance, the 67 year old former chief executive of the united bristol healthcare trust, were found guilty of serious professional misconduct, and they were struck off. The eight month disciplinary hearing .. heard evidence about 53 operations on children in which 29 babies died and four were brain damaged."[72]; "Leading dentists today attacked the medical research council for accepting money from the sugar industry to sponsor a symposium on tooth decay. They accuse the government funded council of lending "spurious scientific respectability" to the sugar bureau (the lobby group of the sugar industry giants such as tate and lyle) by allowing it to sponsor the meeting on monday. A bureau spokeswoman, miriam cummins, confirmed that the group would be paying all the travel, hotel and meal expenses of the speakers at the meeting. Lord jellicoe, a former chairman of tate and lyle, was chairman of the mrc from 1982-1990. The coma panel advised last july that sugar consumption should fall by at least a third from the 90 lbs a year britain's consume."[73]

The procedures for assessing the environmental and health hazards created by new medicines are as riddled with corruption as the parallel process of assessing new chemicals, "The real problem (of the 1968 medicines act) is that there are no clauses that require any product to be beneficial, or indeed to be needed at all. Surely a requirement of need should be the first and most important clause in any medicines act."[74] Tory governments ensured that the work of the committee on the safety of medicines (csm) was inextricably linked to the interests of multi-national corporations even to the extent of using the official secrets act to ensure none of the scientists appointed to the committee stepped out of line, "The committee on the safety of medicines is part of the medicines division of the department of health, not an independent agency. The medicines division which does the day to day work of processing license applications for new drugs, is massively underfunded and understaffed in comparison to the (american) food and drug administration. Thus all evidence of the safety of drugs has to be assessed using the manufacturers' own data. All members of the committee on the safety of medicines have to sign the official secrets act."[75]

Anthony barnett reports, "The department of health approved the use of thousands of human vaccines for diseases such as tetanus and whooping cough made with material likely to have come from bse-infected cattle. This was despite warnings in 1989 from one of the Government's key scientific advisers that injecting such material potentially posed 'the greatest risk' of transmitting bse to humans. Parents have never been told their children may have been in danger. Before the bse scare in 1988, vaccines for diseases such as measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus and whooping cough used bovine serum taken from British cows. When the scare broke, the Government asked Sir Richard Southwood, professor of zoology at Oxford University, to investigate the risk of infection from pharmaceutical products. Southwood was so concerned about the vaccines that he wrote three times to the Department of Health's Committee on the Safety of Medicines demanding 'urgent action'. In 1989, the then-confidential Southwood committee report concluded that 'the greatest risk in theory would be from the injection of material derived from bovine brain or lymphoid tissue'. He later described the risk as 'moderately high'. As a result, in 1989, the Committee on Safety of Medicines issued guidelines that vaccine materials should come from safe herds in countries with no reported cases of bse. Yet this left a stockpile of vaccines already made using material from British cattle likely to have been infected. The vaccines had lifespans of up to five years and could have been used on children as recently as 1993. Until now, the Department of Health has not disclosed what happened to the stockpile of vaccines. In a recent parliamentary answer, Health Minister Tessa Jowell merely confirmed they were not 'disposed of or discontinued'. But Dr Richard Kimberlin, a bse expert who acts as a consultant to drug companies and also advised the Committee on Safety of Medicines at the time of the scare, told The Observer: 'The risks associated with the stockpiled vaccines were not perceived great enough to have them destroyed . . . so yes, these continued to be used.' He said the stockpile would have amounted to 'thousands of doses'. Speaking to The Observer this weekend, Southwood said: 'Studies clearly showed that the greatest risk of infection from bse was not from eating foods but from injection. The highest risk was injecting into the brain, then there was injecting into the body and then through cuts or lacerations.' A source from Lord Phillips's bse inquiry, which last week announced that it would not be reporting until next March, said it was taking the issue of vaccinations 'very seriously'. New variant cjd - the human form of bse - has claimed 40 victims so far, but no hard evidence has yet linked it to eating beef. Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker is demanding that the government reveal what happened to the vaccines after learning of Southwood's concerns in Private Eye. He said: 'This is the first time somebody has admitted these vaccines were used on the public. We now need to know what type of vaccines and how many people might be affected. The government cannot continue to sweep this issue under the carpet.' At the time of the scare, the largest vaccine producers in the UK were SmithKline Beecham, Evans Medevea and Pasteur Merieux MCD. Mike Watson, medical director of Pasteur Merieux, said: 'All our bovine materials are now sourced outside the UK. At the time of the bse scare, we sourced some vaccines from the US and some from Spain, although some did come from the UK. But the risk of bse transmitted in this way is practically zero.' A Department of Health spokeswoman said: 'The Committee on the Safety of Medicines defined the risk to public health from using bovine material in medicinal products as remote and theoretical . . . A judgment was made by the committee that existing supplies should not be withdrawn because, in their view, the risk to public health through loss of confidence in the vaccine programme was greater than the remote theoretical risk associated with the use of bovine materials in vaccine.' She said she could not give details of vaccine use because this information has only been collated centrally since 1992."[79]

"Financial links between food companies and the government's most senior experts on food policy were revealed for the first time yesterday. 12 out of 17 members of the Food Advisory Committee declared some cash reward from food companies."[80]

"Fees paid by food and drug companies to the government's food advisers were revealed for the first time yesterday. The list of interests shows that 3 out of nine members of the committee on Medical Aspects of Food policy are supported by food and drug companies. 31 out of the 59 members of all the committee's panels declare at least one personal or non-personal financial link with a drug or food company."[81]; "The government was accused of frantically back-tracking after announcing red meat was safe to eat. One third of cancers are linked to diet but tucking into average amounts of red meat does not increase the risk, according to a labour-appointed study. In september health secretary frank dobson advised people eating normal amounts of red meat to "consider a reduction" to lower their chances of getting the disease. That sparked a furious row and in a U-turn the government now says consumers need not change their ways. .. the report by the committee on medical aspects of food and nutrition policy. The average brit eats three ounces of cooked red meat - beef, lamb, pork, beefburgers and sausages - per day. It is the 15% who eat more than five ounces who could be putting their health at risk. The COMA panel intended to publish its advice in september after considering evidence linking red meat to bowel cancer - which kills 19,000 britons a year. It recommended people who ate five ounces a day should cut down. Then professor philip james, architect of the new food standards agency, persuaded ministers that the advice should be strengthened. He said the committee had been railroaded by the meat industry. James suggested guidelines similar to those from the world cancer research fund, which backs daily consumption of less than three ounces. After yesterday's report chief medical officer kenneth calman said, "Adults who eat more than the average amount of red meat, especially those who eat a lot more, might benefit from a reduction. Average and below average consumers need not change."[82]

There was a government report about the links between cancer and the meat consumption over the summer but, "The government's report has been delayed yet again and i understand there is now no firm publication date."[83]

"The beef-eaters, myself included, have been saved by our resistance - not by the government scientists, the government vets, and the Department of Health, whose advice has been as dangerously bad about BSE and CJD as it was over HIV, haemophilia and hepatitis C. In a less dramatic way, their tardiness in supporting adequate screening for high blood pressure, breast cancer, cervical cancer and prostatic cancer has made these aspects of British medicine the object of the world's derision."[84]

"The health education authority yesterday endorsed eating red meat in a report published with and financed by the meat and livestock commission."[85]

For decades the medical profession has ruled hospitals like gods. This has led to widescale fatalities.

In 1994 the chief executives of all the main tobacco companies denied on oath before the u.s. congress that nicotine was addictive. In march 1997, however, "A dramatic confession by a cigarette firm in america .. In a massive blow for the industry, liggett group - which makes chesterfields - ended decades of denials to admit cigarettes cause cancer and are addictive. Experts say the admission could have huge implications for the £12.5 billion a year u.k. industry. Rothman international group insisted: "Under the scientific definition we do not believe cigarettes are addictive. Liggett group has agreed to pay 22 u.s. states a quarter of its pre-tax profits for the next 25 years to settle lawsuits. A spokesman for rothman international group said: "The government took more than £9 billion off smokers in taxes last year so they are making a very substantial contribution to the treasury and health funding."[86]; "Worldwide around 5,200 billion cigarettes worth £168 billion are smoked every year, and the market is growing at 5% annually."[87]

The tories' big business ideology (now institutionalized in the form of the gatt agreement and the world trade organization) sabotaged most attempts to control pollution. The government passed weak laws on the environment and then denied pollution regulators the financial resources to monitor pollution and ensure that industry/pharmers complied with the regulations. The government's dismantling of the pollution regulation system reached such shocking levels of irresponsibility that it demoralized many of the country's top pollution regulators. The worst hit was the pollution inspectorate, "The deputy chief of the pollution inspectorate resigned over having just five staff to monitor 5,600 hazardous waste dumps in england."[88] It wasn't long before others left, "Three of the most senior officials in the pollution inspectorate resigned in 1989. Mr ponsford, director of the inspectorate of pollution, prepared an internal report which was leaked to the press and disclosed, "difficulties in recruiting and retaining staff and a sharp drop in the level of pollution monitoring."[89] Whilst some officials escaped this governmental humiliation by resigning, brian ponsford committed suicide.[90] It should not be forgotten that all of these resignations took place at the time when thatcher was strutting around the world stage insisting she was a green who was intent on preventing an ecological disaster.

There are many forms of pollution causing widescale environmental damage which need to be controlled. The current approach toward pollution control is based on the assumption that no chemical is entirely safe so the primary concern is to reduce the risks involved, in its manufacture and use, to acceptable levels. Experiments, on animals, are conducted to find out at what point a chemical becomes a risk to human health (which is bit like trying to learning about football by playing subbuteo) and then laying down regulations to ensure the dangers are sufficiently diluted to prevent anyone being severely harmed. But, 'level of acceptable risk' is a subjective, not a scientific, proposition and is thus all too vulnerable to exploitation by scientists whose livelihoods depend upon the continued profitability of the chemical industry.

The first problem that arises is that tests on new substances are carried out by the company that wishes to promote the substance and which obviously has a vested interest in its profitability. The results of the tests are then vetted by a committee of experts many of whom have financial interests, of one sort or another, in the chemical industry and are thus far from being impartial. The tests are not designed to fix realistic safety standards but to ensure that, if anything goes wrong, the legal repercussions on the company that patented the substance, and the political repercussions on the party that permitted the substance to be put on the market, will be minimal.

"In the UK, the Advisory Committee on Pesticides, which is supposed to advise the government on the control of the use of pesticides, is largely made up of representatives of the agro-chemical industry and various academics whose research grants they pay or otherwise control."[101]

"The boss of the environment agency is allowing genetically modified crop experiments on his land for a second time. Lord de ramsey. the chairman of the government watchdog, sparked fury last year when it was revealed he was allowing gm food giant monsanto to carry out experiments on his land. Despite the row he is now renting 60 acres of his estate in abbots ripton, cambs, to a swedish firm which is carrying out three tests on oilseed rape."[102]

"Food campaigners yesterday criticised the appointment of a leading scientist to head the new food standards agency. They said Oxford professor Sir John Krebs, who will be paid £96,000 a year for the four-day-a-week job, did not have a track record in food or consumer policy. But he insisted that he wanted the agency to be `a beacon of openness and a model for the best use of science.' Sir John, who is former head of the national environment research council, and whose study of badgers helped to bring about a government cull to see whether the animals spread TB to cattle, said he wanted to strengthen `already high standards" of food safety, to ensure that `everyone can have confidence that public health is being properly protected".

"The boss of the environment agency is allowing genetically modified crop experiments on his land for a second time. Lord de ramsey. the chairman of the government watchdog, sparked fury last year when it was revealed he was allowing gm food giant monsanto to carry out experiments on his land. Despite the row he is now renting 60 acres of his estate in abbots ripton, cambs, to a swedish firm which is carrying out three tests on oilseed rape."[103]; "Arpad pusztai's research showed modified potatoes fed to Rats weakened their immune systems and shrunk their internal organs, including their brains. Only last summer pusztai was discredited and forced to resign after revealing his findings. But yesterday 20 international experts supported his research."[104]; "A Downing street spokesman said: "The PM has such confidence in the genetically modified food on sale that he would have no problem consuming it. He is of the view that these products are safe."[105]; "Maybe we have nothing to fear (from GM foods). I'd be happier if i didn't know ministers have met the food industry bosses 81 times since the election to talk about selling gm foods."[106]; "New labour is accused of cosy relations with Frankenstein food firms. Key government figures back the development of genetically modified crops. And some of the key players in tony blair's election victory now work for the gm lobby. David Hill. Veteran labour spin doctor who now advises monsanto. Jack cunningham chairs the biotechnology sub-committee. Stan greenberg. Labour election adviser paid huge fees to help monsanto with its propaganda. Lord sainsbury .. admits he owned the patent on a translator enhanced to produce genetically modified foods."[107]; "Food firms are selling gm produce without realizing it, new research shows. Tests on 200 everyday foods revealed that 60 contained mutant soya or maize but an astonishing 59 producers thought they were gm free."[108]; "Food minister jeff rooker bungled his gm facts yesterday .. Rooker said that land the size of just two football pitches was being used to test genetically modified produce. The average site, he claimed, was about the size of a dining table. But official figures how there are 717 acres of trial sites, equivalent to 350 pitches."[109]; "Tony blair hit the roof yesterday as labour councils voted to ban ‘frankenstein food'. The local government association defied him in a bid to keep genetically modified food out of schools, care homes and meals on wheels. A whitehall source said: "The mood in no.10 was pretty thunderous."[110]; "Restaurants, cafes and burger bars must tell diners if they are eating mutant food, the government aid yesterday. But the information can be passed on verbally and does not have to be printed on menu. The catering trade has six months from today to comply with the eu ruling on gm ingredients. Anyone who fails risk a fine of up to £5,000."[111]